St. Landry democrat. (Opelousas, La.) 1878-1894, 1887-04-02
(Communicated.l
UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE,
SLEEPY Hollow. March %. 1S,

iiS ooSttlHC w HSo- vi obs
side, and vituperation and abuse on thu
other.
Is such enterprise not worthy of s
better cause? Would not the interests
of our country and State be better
subserved by agitating and advocating
a plan that would eliminate from amons
our sutfragists all such persons as car
not read and write? Would they nO
do better to use their energies in adj.
vOcating an amendment to our State
constitution, likely to bring about this
end This is a very important ques
ton, and with our bitter experience
since the question of emancipation has
been settled, it becomes a very serious
one.
| We think the Importance of the case
will Justify us in bringing the subject
before your readers and of giving the
reasons why we think that no man
should be alVOced to rote rhO can moi
read and ,crite. We know the opposi-
ton We must meet, but as we feel fully
justified in recommending and ahvo-
eating what we fully believe to be right,
and in this case fully prepared to give our
reasons to, SO doing, we do not hest
tate to say that the voters in the State
of Louisiana should have little more
education than the dumb brutes that
carry them to the polls.
| We are aware that very wise set of
men declared in our National Constitu-
| ton that call men were created free
and equal,' but in our humble opinion
very wise men may sometimes do very
silly things, and as in this case, allow
| their reason to become the slave of
prejudice.
1t may be very nice theory and an
swer every purpose on many occasions.
1t may be very good Rhetoric, but we
think it poor Logic as it lacks one i'm
portant ingredient and that is truth.
The same wise men would perhaps
lead us to believe that "a call men are
created free and equal" they are all
entitled to the same rights and prlyi-
leges.
Now to prove the falacy of the first
assertion would be to undermine the
groundwork of the whole argument.
and in this connection we would ask if
it were not palpably nearer the truth.
to say that no man was ever born free
and that no two men were ever born
equal?
1t is certainly the case that man ia
born in state of the most helpless de-
penhence on others.
He continues subject to the absolute
CONTROL of others and remains without
many OF the civil and all the political
privileges of society until the period
which the law has fixed AS that at which
he is supposed to have attained the
of his faculties.
Even long previous to this. ine0nali-
ty is perceptihle. even very apparent,
and at this period il is still further de-
veloped and becomes infinite in every
society and under every form of govern
ment. Wealth or poverty; fame or Oh
strength or weakness, knnwi-
edge or ignorance. ease or labor, pnwer
or Subsection, mark the infinite diversi-
ty in the condition of man. These inc
Qualities must and will exist under anv
form OF government that man could |
devise and it is for these reasons we
contend that no man was ever born
free, and that no two men were ever
born equal.
In pursuance of the falacions theories
already advanced, it ia held, that the |
exercise OF franchise ia right of which |
even the ignorant and uneducated |
should not be deprived.
Now females are human and rational |
beings and may be fonnd of better ia
cultles and better qualified to exercise
political privileges and to attain polIti-
sal distinction than many men, vet who
complains of the order of society by
7shich they are excluded
4 youth of eighteen may have powers
which cast into the shade those of any
IT his advanced contemporaries. yet he
IAN exercise no political privilege nor
aspire to any political distinction.
So 1t is plain that of necessity there
nnst be some general rule upon the
ubject in order to exclude from such
privileges those who are untitled to
exercise them by reason of infrmity,
of character or defect
# discretion.
If society should disfranchise indivi-
luals convicted of Infamous crimes
would this he an invasion of their
lights even though their civil liberty
re restricted? Yet this would not he
ustified on the score of their moral
uilt, but that the good of society re-
nired or would be promoted by it,
The natural right of man is to act at
II times and under all circumstances
s pleases him best, but he is of neces-
NV man and must therefore exercise
My civil right. which means that he
ray act at all times and under all cir
as pleases him best, prnvid-
4 snch acts do not interfere with the
ivil rights of others. For instance. il
a natural right that man should en- /
" life. liberty and the Dnrsnit of hap :
mess, but it does not follow that his =;
f. cannot be forfeited, thar his liberfv j
annot he ken away. or that his pnr- :
nit of happiness cannot be invaded, If /,
should prove benefit to society.
Hence if it should prove a benefit to =
,ciety that the ignorant and uneduca- /
d should not be allowed the privilege Q
voting, they should certainly be de- I
ed the popular franchise. If an ac- i
on, the most harmless in its moral Y
laracter should be dangerous to the "a
curity. the peace, or the prosperity. of t
ciety its members would have a right, q
", would be in duty bonnd to prohi- d
t snch action, and take measures y